Forum:Player articles
I was wondering, should we allow articles about players such as this one. I personally think that we shouldn't becuase that's what userpages are for. Ideas? 22:19, February 4, 2010 (UTC) Comment - I think this is a no-brainer. Player articles do not belong in the mainspace at all, as the mainspace is about the game, it's interfaces, it's items, it's areas, it's NPCs, ETC. Let me quote the RuneScape Wiki's Players don't deserve articles policy.: "However, players, no matter how famous at the time, come and go. Therefore, players and clans do not deserve their own articles. If a page is repeatedly re-created, it can be protected from creation. If you want to make an article about a player, whether yourself or another, make it in your userspace. Should you wish to make a page about your clan, the RuneScape Clans Wiki is the place to go." Now let me ever so slightly alter this to reflect War of Legends and our wiki: "However, players, no matter how famous at the time, come and go. Therefore, players do not deserve their own articles. If a page is repeatedly re-created, it can be protected from creation. If you want to make an article about a player, whether yourself or another, make it in your userspace. Should you wish to make a page about your alliance, create it in the Alliance: namespace." The only difference here is that alliance articles are allowed (and put in the Alliance: namespace) because there are not as many alliances in the small game War of Legends as there are in the humongous game RuneScape. We discussed that earlier. We really don't need "ideas" for such a simple subject like this... we have the User: and Alliance: namespaces for these kind of things. Lil Diriz 77 23:15, February 4, 2010 (UTC) Comment - How about if someone wants a player article (for their clan), they can make it a subpage of the alliance? 23:20, February 4, 2010 (UTC) Comment - I don't see why they can't just list their name in their list of members, then link to their userpage? Example: :* Jimbob (User:Jimbob) :Why create a bunch of subpages off of one article when people can use their userpage for what they're meant to be used for? 23:43, February 4, 2010 (UTC) ::That is true I guess. 23:45, February 4, 2010 (UTC) :::;0 so does that solve this? I don't think this needs consensus anyway :S It's an easy concept.. 00:00, February 5, 2010 (UTC) Comment - I'm going to address this particular page about Riemis on this thread: Forum: Alliance Namespace. Unless somebody is of outstanding name recognition across the entire player community, is mentioned numerous times (for good or ill) on other fan sites for their particularly outstanding deeds and have achieved the WOL equivalent of all stats 99 level and have "beat the game" and even gone beyond that accomplishment, no, I don't think individual players deserve articles. As a sub-page from an alliance page, that I might support. Absolutely nobody at all currently playing meets this sort of criteria for even a mention. --Robert Horning 00:21, February 5, 2010 (UTC) :Comment - Creating an article for a "maxed out" player would be the equivalent of creating this or this. 'Nuff said? 00:40, February 5, 2010 (UTC) Comment - I agree with most people here - information about specific players should stay out of the mainspace. (And they certainly don't deserve their own article.) Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 00:48, February 5, 2010 (UTC) Comment - Unlike Diriz, I feel that if the player has achieved a special thing (By special I mean the equivalent of first 99 and first maxed out), they deserve an article. That is only if there is enough info for a FULL article. If not then it should be within a different page. 00:59, February 5, 2010 (UTC) Comment - I'm not saying very, very important players (in some way) shouldn't be recognized at all. For example, the RuneScape Wiki has a whole table for players who achieved the first 99 in a skill. That's historical. Very important things like that should be documented, but NOT on an article dedicated to the player. Put important historical credits to people on the Hiscores article, or the Reputation article, whatever. Hell, put it on the front page like RSW does! Every time a day passes where in previous years, someone was the first to obtain 99 in a skill, RSW puts it in the "On this day..." box on the main page. That sounds like a good idea to me, don't you think? We could have something similar (with originality, though). 01:49, February 5, 2010 (UTC) TL;DR - In short, players don't deserve a full article, but they may be important or unique enough to be mentioned on a relevant article. 01:55, February 5, 2010 (UTC) :The hard thing about that is that each server has different people with different achievements. It's hard to tell who in fact was first or not. 01:56, February 5, 2010 (UTC) ::I've always felt that anything player-specific is either not noteworthy, or unverifiable (or both), and therefore shouldn't be included in any mainspace articles. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 02:38, February 5, 2010 (UTC) :::War of Legends is a bit different due to the fact that most "accomplishments" are at least in theory verifiable. Certainly information about cities, armies, legends, and broad statistics about an alliance can be verified. This said, person of note simply aren't even in the game yet, and I would give it at least a year before anything of that nature happens. The first player to max out their palace (I think level 25) might be a major accomplishment on a list of "firsts", and such accomplishments are announced globally for all players to see that. A full article? Even Zeezema on Runescape barely qualifies, and only because of additional items of note such as the first "highly publicized" in-game wedding or in the case of Cursed You, getting banned for starting the Falador Massacre (after a fashion). I have no idea what might even come close to something of that nature with War of Legends. --Robert Horning 16:38, February 5, 2010 (UTC) Comment - An article about a WoL player? I oppose that. Even if he's famous he doesn't need an article about him-/herself. The name can be mentioned in Triva on certain articles.. but I don't like having a whole article. Maybe some people might not even like to be mentioned on the wiki. 19:42, February 5, 2010 (UTC) Comment - I agree. It seems as though everyone thinks that players don't deserve articles and *if anything* they can be mentioned in the trivia or relevant page. If anyone wants to write a policy about it....<3 20:02, February 5, 2010 (UTC) Comment - I personally wouldn't want my name included in an article, if I happened to do something someone thought was noteworthy... Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 22:08, February 5, 2010 (UTC) Comment - Why can't they just put the information on their userpage instead of creating an article? (SIGNED BELOW) Comment - I feel that, full articles about players is not accepting. But, mentions of players that can be proven may be used. A mention is just that, a mention. No specific details of the player is given, that is why we have User namespaces. Muzzy34 Talk 21:38, February 9, 2010 (UTC) :I agree, if it helps describe an event (or something like that) then it is acceptable. But it must be backed up with at minimum an image. 22:19, February 9, 2010 (UTC) Comment - This needs to end soon! Atleast 2 weeks of being open and from what I see is no consensus. LiamWC72 21:22, February 15, 2010 (UTC) Request for consensus - We've got enough opinions to work with. What do what do about it now? 08:11, March 17, 2010 (UTC) '''Closed - '''No articles of players will be allowed. If users want to discuss their player, they will have to use their userpage. 18:54, March 21, 2010 (UTC)